Radiographic Outcome Following Treatment of Residual Hip Dysplasia with Pemberton Versus Salter Osteotomy: Comparison of Results in Patients Followed to Skeletal Maturity.
Daniel J Sucato, Case E Brabham, Adriana De La Rocha, David A Podeszwa, Lori A Karol
{"title":"Radiographic Outcome Following Treatment of Residual Hip Dysplasia with Pemberton Versus Salter Osteotomy: Comparison of Results in Patients Followed to Skeletal Maturity.","authors":"Daniel J Sucato, Case E Brabham, Adriana De La Rocha, David A Podeszwa, Lori A Karol","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.23.01346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Salter osteotomy (SO) and Pemberton acetabuloplasty (PA) are procedures to treat skeletally immature patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). The purpose of this study was to compare the radiographic results and rate of residual dysplasia (RD) after treatment with SO and with PA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective analysis of pediatric patients treated with either SO or PA for DDH between 1980 and 2013 who were skeletally mature at the time of follow-up. The preoperative and postoperative acetabular index (AI) and postoperative lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) and anterior center-edge angle (ACEA) were collected. RD was defined as an LCEA or ACEA of <20° or an acetabular inclination (AIn) of >15° at skeletal maturity. Continuous variables were compared between treatment groups with 2-sample t tests, and categorical variables were compared using chi-square tests. Multivariable analysis was used to identify risk factors for RD with p < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 113 hips in 102 patients with a mean follow-up of 10.5 years. The SO group had 73 hips treated at a mean patient age of 5.4 years, and the PA group had 40 hips treated at a mean age of 5.3 years. The preoperative AI did not differ between the treatment groups (32.2° versus 31.3°, p = 0.658), nor did the immediate postoperative AI (20.0° versus 20.2°, p = 0.459). At the time of final follow-up, the SO group had a significantly smaller AIn (8.6° versus 13.2°, p = 0.001), a trend toward a greater LCEA (26.2° versus 21.6°, p = 0.056), and a similar ACEA (24.1° versus 26.1°, p = 0.808). By the abovementioned definition, 36 hips (31.9%) had evidence of RD, with a lower rate in the SO group (26.0% versus 42.5%, p = 0.07). Patients who had a positive family history of hip dysplasia were more likely to have RD (odds ratio = 4.311, 95% confidence interval = 1.125 to 16.528).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients with RD could be effectively treated with either SO or PA, with overall good radiographic outcomes. However, SO achieved a better AI and may thus yield better long-term health of the affected hip.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":15273,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.23.01346","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Salter osteotomy (SO) and Pemberton acetabuloplasty (PA) are procedures to treat skeletally immature patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). The purpose of this study was to compare the radiographic results and rate of residual dysplasia (RD) after treatment with SO and with PA.
Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of pediatric patients treated with either SO or PA for DDH between 1980 and 2013 who were skeletally mature at the time of follow-up. The preoperative and postoperative acetabular index (AI) and postoperative lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) and anterior center-edge angle (ACEA) were collected. RD was defined as an LCEA or ACEA of <20° or an acetabular inclination (AIn) of >15° at skeletal maturity. Continuous variables were compared between treatment groups with 2-sample t tests, and categorical variables were compared using chi-square tests. Multivariable analysis was used to identify risk factors for RD with p < 0.05.
Results: The study included 113 hips in 102 patients with a mean follow-up of 10.5 years. The SO group had 73 hips treated at a mean patient age of 5.4 years, and the PA group had 40 hips treated at a mean age of 5.3 years. The preoperative AI did not differ between the treatment groups (32.2° versus 31.3°, p = 0.658), nor did the immediate postoperative AI (20.0° versus 20.2°, p = 0.459). At the time of final follow-up, the SO group had a significantly smaller AIn (8.6° versus 13.2°, p = 0.001), a trend toward a greater LCEA (26.2° versus 21.6°, p = 0.056), and a similar ACEA (24.1° versus 26.1°, p = 0.808). By the abovementioned definition, 36 hips (31.9%) had evidence of RD, with a lower rate in the SO group (26.0% versus 42.5%, p = 0.07). Patients who had a positive family history of hip dysplasia were more likely to have RD (odds ratio = 4.311, 95% confidence interval = 1.125 to 16.528).
Conclusions: Patients with RD could be effectively treated with either SO or PA, with overall good radiographic outcomes. However, SO achieved a better AI and may thus yield better long-term health of the affected hip.
Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (JBJS) has been the most valued source of information for orthopaedic surgeons and researchers for over 125 years and is the gold standard in peer-reviewed scientific information in the field. A core journal and essential reading for general as well as specialist orthopaedic surgeons worldwide, The Journal publishes evidence-based research to enhance the quality of care for orthopaedic patients. Standards of excellence and high quality are maintained in everything we do, from the science of the content published to the customer service we provide. JBJS is an independent, non-profit journal.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
